Past Principal Points
Tuition & Salaries—Three Views
A
few weeks ago the Board reviewed the existing rates for tuition and salaries
and set the new rates for next year. There was considerable discussion
involving balancing the needs of all parties (parents, teachers, students) over
the long haul as well as considering the moral principles behind the decisions.
Afterwards, I began to think about how it is we come to conclusions about these
rather practical matters, and I felt the Lord gave me some new insight about
the economics involved. So, with apologies to Karl Marx, Adam Smith, and others
for the oversimplification, here are my ideas. There are, essentially, three
main economic views about how a society or organization should make economic decisions:
Capitalist, Communist, & Mixed. I suggest that of these, the latter most
clearly reflects a “Christian” perspective though the exact blend in the “mix”
is certainly open to debate. One’s philosophic leanings will guide how one
approaches these practical matters. See if you agree.
Capitalist Tuition
In
a strictly capitalist system parents would pay the full cost to educate each of
their children. There would be no government subsidies, and there would be no
Financial Aid. There would be no reduced rates for the second or third child,
and certainly the fourth child would never be free. Children in junior or
senior high would be charged more because it is more expensive to educate them.
Families who couldn’t afford to pay would be out of luck, of course. No money;
no service. It’s a system designed to reward those who work hard and earn lots
of money, but there is no compassion for those who are less fortunate.
Communist Tuition
In
a strictly communist system, there would be no tuition. All education would be
freely available to all. There would be no private schools, of course, because
all education would be supplied equally to all by the state, and private
schools would be forbidden. Of course, individuals would pay, but this would be
through their taxes; the wealthy would pay more than the poor. All schools
would be more or less equal, and there would be no opportunity for those who
had more money to pay for a better education for their children. Certainly,
there would be no Christian schools because communism is a strictly atheistic
system. It is, however, a system designed to provide for all people equally,
but it provides no incentives for one to do better and try to improve one’s lot
in life.
Christian Tuition
The
Christian approach is founded upon several Biblical principles, and it, in
fact, balances the legitimate elements of both the preceding views. First, the
Bible is clear about an individual’s responsibility to provide for one’s
family. He who does not provide for his own family is to be considered
“accursed.” Parents, not the government, have the responsibility to raise
children in the nurture and admonition of the Lord. At the same time, the Bible is clear that we
are to bear one another’s burdens. The Body of Christ is responsible to care
for one another. Offerings were taken to assist those in need, and there was
support for the widows and orphans. There would therefore be some kind of blend
between user pay and societal or group support.
Capitalist Salaries
In
a strictly capitalist system each teacher would negotiate with a school board
for their pay. In times of teacher shortages, they could bargain for higher
wages; when there was a glut of teachers on the market, they would have to
settle for less. They would use their experience, education, skill,
connections, and persuasive skill to negotiate the maximum amount that they
could get from their employer. There would be no unions, no benefits, and no
job security; each teacher would look out for himself. The board in turn would
attempt to bargain for the lowest salaries and least benefits. Again, this is a
system designed to reward individual skill and initiative.
Communist Salaries
In
a strictly communist system, all teachers would be paid on the basis of need.
There would be job security and benefits for life, and there would be no need
to negotiate. All teachers, regardless of education, experience, and/or ability
would be treated the same; however, teachers with larger families would be paid
more because they have greater needs. Benefits would not be deducted from
salaries but provided free of charge to all. There would never be a concern
about losing one’s job to changing markets or competing with someone else to
get a job. Everyone would be employed.
Christian Salaries
Again,
the Biblical view balances both of the alternatives. Individual talent is
recognized and honored in Scripture: “Do you see a man skilled in his work? He
will perform before kings,” and “the laborer is worthy of his hire.” At the
same time, Christians are commanded to “bear one another’s burdens and so
fulfill the law of Christ.” Paul took up an offering from the Corinthian
Christians to send to those in
Achieving Balance
The
two biggest financial decisions that a school board can make have to do with
tuition and salaries. When it comes to income, tuition is the largest element
over which the board has control. Government grants are beyond the board’s
control, and fundraising is always problematic. This is not to say that there
isn’t room for improvement. Corporate donations could generate a lot of money
in the future. Increasing the student-teacher ratio is an even faster way of
raising additional funds. However, even if both of these were done, decisions
must still be made about how to use that money: Reduce tuition? Increase
salaries? Save for buildings?
When
it comes to expenses, salaries and benefits are the largest single element over
which the board has control. Indeed they are the largest expense in the budget.
While some savings can be achieved in various other areas, they pale in
comparison. The second major area of expense is facilities. The cost of saving
for (or paying for, or borrowing for) capital purchases and maintaining them
once obtained are second only to salaries and benefits.
While
there is no right and wrong about what level of tuition should be charged and
what level of salaries should be paid, it is clear that there are certain
overarching Biblical principles which must be considered. Parental
responsibility for education is clear in Scripture and great weight must be
placed on parents to accept this duty to educate their children in the Lord. At
the same time, the Scriptures are clear that we do not live for ourselves alone
and that we are, indeed, our “brother’s keeper.”
Finally,
these two competing interests must be balanced in such a way that a quality
education is provided for children for now and in the future. Tuition which is
too high will turn away families and reduce the numbers of children enrolled
and therefore undermine the reason for the school’s existence. Tuition which is
too low will not provide adequate salaries to attract and retain the kind of
teaches who will provide a quality education. Poor quality education will
obviously undermine enrollment as well. At AKCS, our school board has wrestled
through these issues and sought to balance the interest of parents, teachers
and students in a way that is fair, reasonable, and sustainable. The budget is
balanced; money is being set aside for building, and tuition and salaries are,
if not “ideal”, at least “competitive.”
Principal,
Copyright © 2002/2003 Airdrie Koinonia Christian
School Last modified: March 4, 2003